Presence

I Want To See This Movie

The Forward, Haredi Life, Too Purely Rendered, reviews the film My Father, My Lord (in Hebrew, "Hofshat Kayitz").

It's not available on Netflix; if anyone in Israel knows where to get this on DVD, please get in touch.

Movie Trailer: Defiance

"In WWII Russia, Jewish refugees band together into a brigade that hides in the forest, ambushes Germans and survives until war’s end, eventually 1200 strong."

Starring Daniel Craig, Liev Schreiber and Jamie Bell. Directed by Ed Zwick. More information at IMDB.

Shomer Shabbos

From the NY Times article on Ethan Coen's new play "Almost an Evening," way down at the bottom:

“Our next movie is all about Hebrew school,” Mr. Coen said, with excitement, “in a big way.” It starts shooting in Minnesota this spring.

Candidly autobiographical, “it’s about a family of four in the Midwest, in 1967,” he said, “and one of the kids is about to be bar mitzvahed. Yes, horrible things happen.”

Can't wait! Looks like it might be called Suburbicon.

Preemptive Justice in the Torah

In the book The Minority Report (The Collected Stories of Philip K. Dick, Vol. 4), by science fiction legend Philip K. Dick (and the subsequent film starring Tom Cruise), future criminals are arrested before they commit a crime. In Dick's future world, new precognition technology allows law enforcement to see into the future and stop a bad guy before he commits a heinous act. The bad guys are locked up without every having committed a crime. I won't spoil the book for you, it's an excellent read, but it does bring up an interesting question: is it just to hold someone morally responsible for a crime he has yet to commit?

The instinctive response is that this is unjust. How can one be convicted of a crime without having done anything? However, in fact, we do already punish some individuals for only thinking or planning on committing a crime; conspiracy to commit murder and reckless driving are some examples where we punish even though nothing happened. In these cases, the behavior exhibited shows that the offender would have committed a greater offense, and so punishment is justified even though nothing was actually done (part of this depends on how you view the function of punishment, but that's a post for another day).

Beyond this, however, a deeper question arises: wouldn't it be possible that, although this person planned on committing a crime, that they would, at the last minute, for some inexplicable reason, decide not to? How can we punish, or hold responsible, someone who might, at the last minute, change their mind?

Of course, this gets into a broader discussion of man's free will, or perhaps his perception of his free will, which is a topic for another time. The question I would like to address here is: what is the Torah's perspective?

I was a bit surprised to find that the Torah, in fact, addresses this topic directly. In Devarim 21:18-21, the Torah states:

18 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, that will not hearken to the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and though they chasten him, will not hearken unto them; 19 then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; 20 and they shall say unto the elders of his city: 'This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he doth not hearken to our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.' 21 And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die; so shalt thou put away the evil from the midst of thee; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

The famous case of the Ben Sorer, the Rebellious Child. The Mishnah goes to great lengths to show that a case of Ben Sorer is extremely unlikely to ever occur; the parameters for qualification are so specific that the Talmud goes so far as to propose that the whole parsha is simply a thought experiment. But what is the thought?

The Mishneh in the eight chapter of Sanhedrin makes this clear:

בן סורר ומורה, יידון על שם סופו--ימות זכאי, ואל ימות חייב: שמיתתן של רשעים--הניה להם, והניה לעולם; ולצדיקים--רע להם, ורע לעולם.

The Rebellious Child is judged by his future deeds; better for him to die in merit, than to die after committing a crime. For death, for evildoers is a benefit to them, and to the world, while death for a righteous individual is bad for them, and bad for the world.

We see that the purpose of the passage of the Ben Sorer is to teach that, in certain circumstances, we are so certain of the future path of a particular individual, we take preemptive action to prevent it from occurring. If we have enough information as to his background, which will inevitable inform his future actions, the Torah tells us that we can, with certainty, take preemptive measures. In the case of the Rebellious Child, those circumstances are so many and specific to the point that they will never happen, but that's not the point; for some people, the Torah feels, their past completely determines their future actions, with no hope of their exercising free will to change it. In this case, it's better to act preemptively than to let the evil transpire.

As further proof that preemptive justice is the point of the parsha of Ben Sorer, take a look at the last two mishnayos in the eighth chapter of Sanhedrin. The penultimate mishnah uses the same language that was previously used to describe the Ben Sorer: "A tunneling burglar is judged by his future deeds." In this case, as the burglar has gone to so much trouble to break into a house, if confronted by the owner, he won't hesitate to commit murder. One is, therefore, allowed to kill a tunneling burglar without fear of reprisal [this case is interesting in that the burglar is destined to commit murder only if he is confronted; so there is a potential that he will not do anything - yet preemptive justice is still sanctioned]. And the final mishnah lists those the cases where one is allowed to kill another person to prevent them from harming another, the classic example of which is the rodef, one who is chasing another person with intent to kill. Again, the example shows the sanction, in this case, of preemptive action to prevent a crime from being committed.

As strange as it may sound, we see that preemptive justice is sanctioned in specific cases by the Torah. When an individual's past, a combination of his biology and experiences, unfold in specific ways, their future actions are certain, beyond the realm of choice. In these cases, the Torah instructs that it is better to prevent the certain future event from taking place, than to allow events to unfold on their own.

Rav Documentary Playing Charles Theatre on Sunday

Baltimore Hebrew University is holding a screening of Lonely Man of Faith: The Life and Legacy of R. Joseph B. Soloveitchik this Sunday, February 25th at The Charles Theatre. Although both the film's site and The Charles' website don't specify a time, I've heard it's showing around 2:00PM. Matinees at The Charles are usually $6.

The Senator Theatre Raises $109K in Two Weeks, Out of Trouble

The Senator Theatre website has updated to say they've successfully raised the $109,000 to prevent foreclosure. Hurray! I hope it will last them for some time, there was no word on how long this money would hold them over for.

Close to Home - Israeli Cinema

I thought this movie trailer looked interesting:

Compelling and controversial, CLOSE TO HOME, has been celebrated by festival audiences worldwide as it chronicles the day to day life of two young Israeli women, Smadar and Mirit, during their compulsory military service. They are paired together, despite their differences, to patrol the streets of Jerusalem. Mirit is respectful of her superiors, while Smadar barely conceals her desire to rebel. When a tragic event occurs, they are quickly reminded of their surroundings and must learn to overcome their differences.

More here.

Protect our Cultural Treasures (and, Free Hat!)

South Park Ep. 609 Free Hat

Somehow I missed this episode of South Park. I'm glad to see Matt and Trey agree with me.

Don't Fear The Reaping

From the Coming Soon Department:

In The Reaping, Hilary Swank plays a former Christian missionary who lost her faith after her family was tragically killed, and has since become a world renowned expert in disproving religious phenomena. But when she investigates a small Louisiana town that is suffering from what appear to be the Biblical plagues, she realizes that science cannot explain what is happening and she must regain her faith to combat the dark forces threatening the community.

For more Reaping fun, check the Apple Trailers page for the HD version of the trailer.

Historic Senator Theatre up for Foreclosure

Baltimore's historic Senator Theatre is subject to foreclosure if they don't repay a $91,000 debt in less than two weeks; if they are unable to produce the money, the Theatre goes up for auction at the end of February. The Senator Theatre's website has a link to contribute via Paypal, but what they really need is some person or persons with deep pockets to step in and save the day.

The Baltimore Sun has a good article on the current situation, including details of the challenges of running a single-screen theatre in the age of the multiplex. I would like to think there are creative ways a small theatre could attract audiences, but I know very little about the film industry. The article also details the massive amount of debt the current owners have amassed, as well as the help the theatre has received from Baltimore City over the years.

Seeing a movie at the Senator is a unique experience; when going to a movie, I first check the Senator to see if it's playing there. I would hate to see the Senator close, although it seems from the articles that it's quite possible that the theatre would go up for auction and simply continue operating under new ownership; I'm sure there's a chance that won't happen as well.

[Update: A very interesting article from the City Paper on the dynamics of the film industry in Baltimore.]

Getting Scooped

I was never a fan of Woody Allen; as a kid, a few brief glimpses on cable of Allen dressed as some sort of sex-crazed, low-budget robot butler and the whole Soon Yi incident were about all I had to work with, leaving me uninterested in his art. In the past few weeks, I've watched, and loved, both of his recent films, which makes me want to go back and see him in his prime (Annie Hall and Manhattan are now both in my Netflix queue).

Last night I watched Scoop, Allen's follow-up to Match Point. While Match Point is a tragedy of sorts, Scoop is definetly a comedy. Beyond the hilarious one liners delivered by both Allen and Johansson (when Scarlett Johannson's character Sondra Pransky tells Allen she is falling in love with suspected murderer Hugh Jackman, Allen asks, "You come from an Orthodox family, would they accept a serial killer?"), the film is really about Being versus Becoming.

Scoop opens with Ian McShane's character, a recently deceased journalist who in life never stopped seeking for the next big story, on his way across the River Styx to the eternal, unchanging lands, when he stumbles across information that could have given him the biggest scoop of his former life. McShane cheats death to bring the information to Johansson, a young journalism student who is short on experience but long on determination, sensing in her a familar drive to uncover the truth. Through a strange series of events, Johansson ends up forming a detective tag team with Allen's Sidney Waterman, also known as Splendini, an aging stage magician who seems trapped in the Vaudeville era. As the film progresses Allen's septegenarion curmudgeon begins to come alive again, reinvigorated by his youthful companians enthusiams. In the mean time, Johansson begins to fall for the would-be criminal, and slacks off the investigation, prefering instead to maintain the status-quo of her new found romance. All the characters are transitioning from a state of Being to Becoming, from the passive to the active, or vice versa.

I find it somewhat interesting that Allen chose Johansson for this project, having just worked with her on Match Point. Just as the aging Splendini is reinvigorated by the youthful enthusiasm imparted by Sondra, Allen's real-life film-making activities seem similarly reanimated by his collaboration with Ms. Johansson. The film shows the power of love to cause one to both invigorate and stagnate, depending on the circumstances.

Casino Royale: Best Bond Ever

The title says it all. What an awesome movie.

80's Classics

My chavrusah and I got a little side tracked (it began with a discussion of time travel) and were reminiscing some of the cooler movies/tv shows from the 80's, particularly ones we'd like to share with our kids.

The short list:

• Explorers - I can't tell you how many times I watched this on TV. Until they get to the alien spaceship, this movie is perfect; from then on, it's just good.


• The Last Starfighter - seriously, who doesn't, at some point in their childhood, think, "Maybe the video game I'm playing is actually a recruiting tool for an oppressed alien race's fighter pilot squadron?"


• War Games - Shall we play a game?


• Flight of the Navigator - I don't remember much of what happened in this flick, but I remember the ship was very, very cool.


• Land of the Lost - nothing beats a 70's show making a comeback in the 80's. When I was six, I was obsessed with two things: dinosaurs and Star Wars. Land of the Lost had elements of both. Plus killer special effects.


• Voyagers! - Han Solo clone travels through time with overly educated whizkid (who we all wanted to be). I was totally in love with this show, as it was both educational and fun. If I could find a DVD of this series, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

I think I'm going to buy some of these on DVD (thank you, Amazon Credit Card) and watch them with my son. I hope the CGI hasn't made it impossible for him to enjoy the stories that stimulated my imagination as a young lad.

More here

At the DC Jewish Film Festival

Also screening at the DC Jewish Film Festival is Be Fruitful and Multiply:

For ultra-orthodox women there is no higher commandment than the biblical imperative to “be fruitful and multiply.” In many instances this results in families with 10, 12 or even 16 children—as is the case of one Brooklyn mother profiled in this probing documentary. What must it be like to spend most of your married life either pregnant or nursing? Director Shosh Shlam presents us with a pair of women who revel in their roles as head of their large broods. On the other hand, Shlam also presents two ultra-orthodox women who decided to limit their family size. Yentl, who appears in the film without her husband’s knowledge, goes so far as to assert that many of these perpetually-pregnant women are not as happy as they claim, but caught up in the peer pressure to produce large families. With an even-handedness that gives voice to both sides of the debate, Be Fruitful and Multiply provokes a fascinating discussion of the role of the ultra-orthodox woman.

It's like Trembling Before God, only for balabustas. There's a panel discussion afterwards that looks to be incredibly well-rounded.

It's playing the same night as The Rav flick. Who's up for a road trip?

The Rav, The Movie

Lonely Man of Faith, the documentary film on the life and legacy of R. Soloveitchik, is screening at the DC Jewish Film Festival on Thursday, December 7th at 8pm.

Match Point - A Modern Tragedy

Just finished watching Match Point, a Woody Allen film. The movie takes the form of a quasi-operatic tragedy with a modern twist; traditionally, the main character in a tragedy suffers a downfall which is "downfall is brought about by either a character flaw or a conflict with some higher power such as the law, the gods, fate, or society." In contrast, the film opens with the following statement from the main character;

The man who said "I'd rather be lucky than good" saw deeply into life. People are afraid to face how great a part of life is dependent on luck. It's scary to think so much is out of one's control. There are moments in a match when the ball hits the top of the net and for a split second it can either go forward or fall back. With a little luck it goes forward and you win. Or maybe it doesn't and you lose.

What follows is begins as a somewhat interesting romance, progresses into a frantic drama, and ends as a thriller with a satisfying twist at the end. There's some slow parts in the middle, but I thought the end was worth the wait. I'd wanted to see this film for a while, I'm just lucky we rented it.

Attack The Jew!

A deleted scene from the Borat movie:

Someone should write an article or post detailing how Baron Cohen/Borat effectively uses faux-bigotry to disarm and expose the latent antisemitism that still thrives in the hearts and minds of much of the enlightened world.

Let's Go Bowling

Joe Morgenstern of the WSJ begins to scratch the surface; in Deconstructing The Dude:

Young people in particular identify with the Dude's slackerdom because they're feeling pressured by the need to make fateful choices in a complex, competitive world.

Read the Megillah? I'll just see the movie!

No, not Elvis. One Night With the King is a cinematic retelling of the Book of Esther. Check out the two trailers, the first with requisite Hollywood voice over and dramatic music, the second with...Enya? Yeah...somehow I don't think this is going to be quite the cultural juggarnaut that Passion of the Christ was.

As for the cast: John Rhys-Davies is pretty awesome in whatever, but I can't imagine he was sitting at home in his library, smoking a pipe in his high-back leather chair, reading the classics, thinking, "Oh, how I've longed to play Mordecai! I could play him with such gravitas!" As for everyone else, well, you've got to feed the monkey.

I think they could have done a lot better with the title. Also, inquiring minds want to know: will Vashti have a tail?

The cast list is interesting: Peter O'Toole is playing Samuel (The Prophet, not The Sperling), some other guy is playing Jesse, which suggests that the narrative will go beyond the content of the Book of Esther itself, in an attempt to frame the story in a greater historical context. I wonder, as the folks behind this film are most certainly not Members of the Tribe (the homepage includes the logo of the American Bible Society, whose mottoe is "Sharing God's Word with the World") if they've taken some creative liberties and included some Chrisitan/Messianistic overtones.

One last note: the cast lists Xerces as the king, no mention of any Achashverosh. Just an interesting note, for those who are in the know; I don't want to get into the whole thing right now, as I haven't had my coffee yet (actually, I don't drink coffee). [Thanks Sara K. for the tip!]

Operatic Tendencies

Nabucco (apparently Italian for Nebchadnezzar) is playing at the Baltimore Opera. I saw an ad for it somewhere online and found the teaser dialogue intriguing enough to click through:

“I am God.” --Nabucco
“I don’t think so.” --God
“Zzzzzzaaaaaaapppp!” --Lightning Bolt

Then I looked at the ticket prices, and was a little less intrigued. Culture's nice and all, but it also comes on DVD.

O.A.R. On Screen

In the movie She's The Man, several O.A.R. posters are visible in the opening scene.

She's The Man is based on Shakespeare's Twelfth Night (much in the way O Brother, Where Art Thou? isn't based on Homer's The Odyssey).

(Hat tip: Ari G.)

Superman: Return my Money, Please

Superman Returns was horrible. Not just bad, horrible. It was slow, boring and lame.

Nothing happened for the first 30 minutes. NOTHING. Then there's about an hour of down time. And the last one and a half hours...NOTHING HAPPENS.

At one point, towards the end of the film (the "climax," as it's typically called), the theatre went quiet, and all we heard was the sound of someone snoring! This guy snored through the rest of the movie. I can't think of a better way to describe to you how bad this film was. People were walking out before the end, it was that bad.

Please, take my advice and avoid this movie like the plague.

I can't believe I'm going to say this, but...Superman Returns: worse than The Phantom Menace. That's right, I'd rather watch Jar Jar Binks than sit through that again.

See you later, Mrs. Chang

Random Rushmore anecdote: Sara Tanaka, who played Margaret Yang in Rushmore, was also in Old School, playing the part of Megan Huang. In one scene, she is meeting with Jeremy Piven, who plays Dean Pritchard:

Megan: Are you bribing me?

Dean: Don't make life harder on yourself, Chang.

Megan: It's Huang.

Dean: Whatever.

Also, Olivia Williams plays Dr. Moira McTaggert in X-Men 3. If you didn't stay till the end of the credits, you may have missed her.

Good Clean Mutant Fun

X-Men: The Last Stand was awesome. Sure, the dialogue was cheesy, at times reminiscent of a coming-out after-school special. But I'm able to look past that because this X-Men movie, unlike it's predecessors, had lots of what I want to see when I go to an X-Men movie: crazy mutant fight scenes. The first two were fun, but there was way too much emoting and talking, and not enough laser beams, flying mutants or cool powers. If I want to see kung fu, I'll watch kung fu; when I watch X-Men, I want to see weird stuff, and lots of it, and this movie just plain delivered.

Although a bit lame, my favorite part was when Iceman went full-on; I only wish they'd done some sort of ice spikes thing...oh well. Seriously, this was good times.

What's Up, Rick Hunter?

The cool thing about Robotech: Harmony Gold wanted to do a mecha/anime show for the US market, but didn't have enough episodes from any single Japanese series to fill up a whole season. So instead they took three seperate series, created a completely new story using the existing moving images as a basis, and retrofit their story on top of the existing footage. The end result is a unique, single continuous and coherent narrative, totally different in meaning than the original component narratives.

And it comes off pretty good. Granted, it's a bit hard to follow at times (OK, so the bad guys are these giant aliens...no wait, they really work for these mind control guys who travel in groups of three...who were really the good guys fighting a race of killer robot alien botantists...), but, to a kid, it makes figuring it all out all the more interesting.

Reminds me of something...can't quite put my finger on it. Oh yeah! What's Up, Tiger Lily! Phew, that was a close one.

George Lucas Sucks

Man, I hate George Lucas. Actually, hate doesn't quite adequately convey how I feel. I think utter and complete disgust, derision and contempt are more correct. George, you are a hypocrite, and a talentless, self-absorbed dilettante. There is no way I am buying this. NO WAY. George Lucas, you SUCK.

By the way, I called this.

The Ten Commandments, Part 2 - This Time, It's Personal

So, it's pretty clear that this updated version of The Ten Commandments is a dud. It's boring and underwhelming. I haven't seen the original in quite some time, so I'm unable to compare the two, but I don't think Omar Shariff's turn as Jethro is likely to go down in the history books as one of his more memorable performances. I watched last night's episode of 24 today, it was a good one. Jack Bauer is one bad dude. If he had been in Egypt, God wouldn't have needed to send any plagues. Just give Bauer 5 minutes alone with Pharoah, and the Jews would have been on their way.

And so: It begins.

- Pharoah at the sea: I'm yelling, "No, Pharoah, don't go in there! Don't go in there!" Of course, he does. He never listens.

- Mental note if I ever make my own Ten Commandments movie: Invest in lots of extras, or add them in with CGI. It makes a huge difference. In some scenes it looks like Pharoah got his tunic all in a bunch over the equivalent of a boy scout troop.

- Sayid, lying dead on the beach. If I space out a little, I can almost pretend I'm watching Lost.

- I'm pretty sure Miriam is the only woman on screen.

- Is Moses "The One?" Only Morpheus knows for sure.

- The manna looks like parmesan cheese. Why did I think of it as loaves?

- First commercial. This is painful, I don't know if I can make it.

- So the Jews were the first to make training camps for war in the desert. How ironic.

- HOLY COW. Moses is telling the old joke, "A man is trapped on a roof, the flood waters rise...a boat comes by, a helicopter...but the man refuses them and says he is waiting for God." Oh yeah, we have to gamble, to give God a way to give us the money! Oh this is too much.

- And now Moses is beating up Joshua. I'm pretty sure that never happened.

- Joshua is basically the Maximus of the Jews. Got it.

- Moses' pre-battle pep talk is rather dull. Doesn't even hold a candle to William Wallace. Even Theoden did a better job.

- Amalek attacks: Look out, they've got a horse! Oh, there's another one!

- Was that Hur adulterating (that was the same guy who stood next to Moshe during the battle with Amalek)? Who was that woman?

- So Yitro is telling Moshe he can't trust anyone, not even his brother. He's supposed to be telling Moshe that he has to trust others, and set up a legal system that doesn't rely on him as a single point of failure.

- Tzipporah: the original Jewish mother guilt trip. And she wasn't even Jewish! Is there any source for this stuff? Where are they getting it from?

- Hebrew Law and Order: very chaotic. Silly woman: beating your wife wasn't illegal back then.

- Hur killed a guy, because he was found making out with his wife? Where is this coming from?

- So Moses figures out what God has been trying to tell him. The thing about God is that he is One. The One. The Only One. Now, he is ready.

- So, as far as I can tell, the movie is presenting this whole Hur subplot in place of the m'koshesh (Numbers 15:32-36). But it's being used to bring out the need for justice within the community, and Moshe's reluctance to act as the hand of justice. Ultimately, the whole process leads to the giving of the Torah (or, at least as far as this movie is concerned, the Ten Commandments). Sadly, there's little support for any of this.

- I do like how the movie Moses uses his experience of killing the Mitzri to understand the motivations of the murderer. It's a lot more real and meaningful than the old, "Moshe knew the Egyptian was worthless, so it was OK to kill him," explanation.

- Na'aseh v'nishma came out simply as, "YES!"

- "Where, o where has Moses gone? Oh, where, oh where could he be?"

- Ahh, good old Avodah Zarah. And there was much rejoicing.

- Moses comes down the mountain: "Oh NO you didn't!"

- From Moses to Walter: "This is not 'Nam! There are rules!"

- Ok, let's see some real Divine retribution here. The plagues were kind of pathetic. It's time for Angry Diety Justice.

- OK, that was gruesome.

- OK, they got the Ten Commandments! And there was much rejoicing (actually, not so much). There's the aron, no miskan.

And so it ends.

Live Blogging "The Ten Commandments"

I'm watching the new version of The Ten Commandments (while I finish up my taxes); I'll do my best to live-blog my thoughts. I'll repost new comments at each commercial break.

- Missed the first few minutes.

- The midrash quoted by Rashi about Paroah's astrologers pinpointing a threat from the slaves is depicted as motivation for a baby killing spree that leads to Moses being set afloat on the Nile.

- Some lady called Moses, "The Chosen One." Awesome.

- Lots of backstory thats not in the Chumash, I'm not sure if it's in the midrashim either. Batya's other son, details of the other gods, Egyptian theology.

- Kid Moses is shown Joseph's tomb by other Hebrews. The midrash states Joseph's bones were interred either under the Nile, or by the Egyptians.

- Moshe killed the Egyptian because he was attempting to rape a Hebrew slave, and her husband fought back.

- Moshe's indentification with his people seems to stem from a sense of destiny; he wonders why he was spared, when so many other Hebrew babies were killed. Contrast this to the rest of the Jews; they are all wondering, "Where is God, why has he let this happen to us?" Because of his circumstances, Moshe is the only Jew who feels a sense of Divine Providence.

- Moshe has mad rock-fighting skills, and perhaps anger-management issues.

- Tzipporah is making weird sheep calls. Mazel Tov! They are married. Mazel Tov! They have a baby. Lots of PDA.

- "I name you Gersham [sic], which means stranger, like the stranger you took into your family." Sure, whatever.

- "Horeb, the Holy Mountain; it's not safe to go near there." Like the Elephant Graveyard from The Lion King?

- The Burning Bush: God speaks quietly, almost in a whisper. Moshe's complaints are rather feeble. We only get one sign (the staff to snake). When God is finished speaking, the flames in the bush dwindle and go out. This scene lacked gravitas, there was little to no drama or emotion here.

- Aharon has got a bit of a chip on his shoulder.

- Moshe is not stuttering. Lots of little things wrong here.

- Moshe's snake/staff is supposed to eat the other snakes, not kill them...

- Pharoah seems to be falling back on the Egyptian gods, rather than viewing himself as a god.

- Baltiblogs is hosed, can't update right now.

- I liked how they showed the Hebrews turning against Moses; this aspect is often underemphasised or totally overlooked.

- Blood!

- Frogs here! Frogs there! Actually, I think they could have used more frogs.

- The plagues are shown as cause and effect; blood caused the frogs to leave the river and invade the land, which caused animals to die? Then locusts...Out of order!

- We jump straight to boils, then hail (which was pretty cool).

- Now Pharoah gets his God complex. They are playing up the relationship between Pharoah and his first-born, obviously to lend weight to Makkos Bechoros. Yawn.

- Just filed my taxes; We're getting back over $4K, which is good, because I haven't gotten a paycheck since February.

- Now I'm wishing I had just watched 24.

- Moses: "Tell your children to tell their children. Never Forget!"

- Did they eat Maror in Egypt? I don't think they did.

- Aharon as vekker, going door to door.

- Here come the Mitzrim. They've got like 6 chariots! Run!

- Moshe splits the sea. Lots of inconsistencies here. Nice usage of stock footage. It supposed to be dry land!

- Wait, Moses stayed behind! He's going to sacrifice himself, just like Bruce Willis did in Armaggedon!

And so ends part 1. Thank God. Tune in tomorrow, if I've got the strength.

Restriction and Creativity

The description of a new film, Drawing Restraint 9, caught my eye:

The core idea of Drawing Restraint 9 is the relationship between self-imposed resistance and creativity...

I'm not sure I've ever formulated this idea in writing, but I've long felt that there is a strong relation between restriction and creativity. The imposition of boundaries on the creative instinct acts as a catalyst for creative activity, rather than stifling it. Rather than unbridled and uncontrolled creativity that can often be destructive, the imposing framework of rules helps to channel and direct the creativity, enhancing the meaning in the process. There's any number of examples of this: Shabbos, haiku, rock and roll, Brisker hakiras; I could give hundreds of examples.

So I was quite interested to see this idea expressed in the film's description. Unfortunately, things went downhill from there. The description continues:

...a theme it symbolically tracks through the construction and transformation of a vast sculpture of liquid Vaseline, called “The Field”, which is molded, poured, bisected and reformed on the deck of the ship over the course of the film.

Ohhhh-kay...Waiter, check please! You can watch the trailer if you like, the words that came most readily to mind were "Bjorkian nightmare" (afterwards, I noticed Bjork in fact stars in the film). It's pretty wacky; perhaps we need to put a few more strictures on her creativity.

You Can Learn A Lot From A Bunny

Metaphilm has a post up called "The Curse of the Were-Rabbit: Fear of a Vegan World." The article expounds upon the deeper meaning behind Wallace's machinations to rid himself of his lust for cheesy comestibles, representing Man's longing to rid himself of aggresion. The article draws a connection between meat consumption and violence:

For us to eat a cow, someone needs to kill a cow. Every slice of meat, therefore, symbolizes residual societal violence, and societally—at least in the West, it would seem—our values are slowly moving toward non-violence. Our hunger for meat is a sign of our aggression or a remnant of the aggression of our forefathers. We distance ourselves by hiring people to do our killing for us, but the killing is still there and we know it. People do our killing for us at the deli and in wartime. Most of us never know the real cost of eating a steak or waging a war.

It reminded me of God's concession to Noach, permitting animal slaughter to slake Man's thirst for blood. Check out the whole article, it's worth a read. Looking back, I'm not sure how we got from cheese to meat, but I think the overall theme of Man's manliness is spot on.

Rite of Passage

Ever since my son Ezra (age 6) was born, I have been waiting for the day which turned out to be today: The day I sat down with him for his first viewing of Star Wars.

Star Wars, without question, had the most profound affect on me as a child, more than just about any other thing I was exposed to. Only until Lucas murdered the good name that was Star Wars with the prequels did my feelings for these films become tempered back to the level of near quasi-rationality.

I debated for a long time when would be the right time to introduce Ezra to Star Wars. We do try to minimize the amount of violence he is exposed to, and the original, despite the mutilations it suffered at the hands of it's only-lately self-righteous creator (HAN SHOT FIRST!!!), has a fair bit of death in it. I first saw Star Wars at a much younger age, and recall asking my parents what really happened when a Storm Trooper got shot (my father, to his credit, told me an actor had to die each time). I also debated for a moment whether Ezra should see Star Wars in chronological or historical order (this decision was easily made in less than 10 seconds). All in all, now seemed to be the right time.

Overall, I think he liked it. I'm not sure there was the same level of amazement for him in the sights and sounds that there was for me; he's used to CGI and video games, that weren't around in my day. But I don't think he's ever been exposed to a story so grand, so epic, as Star Wars, and I think that is what he liked.

One thing that couldn't be helped: due to older nephews and other bits and pieces of pop culture that make their way into our home, he is already aware of Darth Vader's true identity. I am not sure, but I think he is still unaware of...sister. We shall see.

It's strange to think about; will this thing, that had such a profound affect on my life, play as significant a role in my son's life? The times have changed, and perhaps what worked for the fathers will not work for the sons. In so many ways I want him to love it as I loved it, to have it open his mind the way it opened mine; and yet I know he is his own person, and while it may not be Star Wars that plays the role, something else may well serve to inspire him in ways both similar and different.

Seek The Codes

Watch the new trailer for The Da Vinci Code.

Did you see the secret message?

In case you didn't, take the title of this post, and turn it into a web site. Welcome to the Rabbit Hole. I don't have time for this.

"Yes, but I've been out to sea for a long time."

I saw The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou. As with other Anderson escapades, I enjoyed the show, and about eight to twelve hours later, found myself unable to dislodge the story or characters from my mind.

Some thoughts: Steve Zissou is a child in man's clothing. His entire world is the stuff of any eleven-and-a-half year olds' dreams: he's a famous oceanographer, adventurer and film-maker, living in a miniature world where his word is gospel, there's always an intern on hand to mix you a drink, and females are gratuitously bereft of any upper-body coverage. He's got his own submarine, helicopter and island. And of course, everybody get's a gun. He crusies the high seas with his crew, searching out new and exciting life forms, returning home to fame, glory and the envy of his peers. Ned is likewise psychologically trapped somewhere near puberty. He shows up looking for a father in full Air Kentucky ("we hub out of Louisville") regalia, having followed his childhood dream and become a pilot.

The movie is replete with other grownups acting like children. When Steve deigns to choose Klaus for the A Team in the assualt on the pirate stronghold (PIRATES!), he responds, "Thanks a lot for not picking me," and suddenly we're back on the soccer field at recess, kicking the dirt as we watch the other kids play.

What I like best about the movie, is that Anderson, when presented with the need to develop a context in which oceanographer Steve Zissou plys his trade, had two choices: he could either meticulously research and portray marine life as it actually exists, as any serious scientist would do, or he could create a fantastic world of crayon pony fish and jaguar sharks, products not of the laboratory, but of the overactive imagination of a child. And he chose the latter.

"If you're not against me, don't cross this line. If yes, do. I love you all."

Via the Blogdigger Media .MOV feed, I found links to clips from The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, the one movie I'm looking forward to this holiday season. There's even an mp3 of David Bowie's Queen Bitch, which has been stuck in my head since I saw the first trailer.

Revisionist History

"I am very concerned about our national heritage, and I am very concerned that the films that I watched when I was young and the films that I watched throughout my life are preserved, so that my children can see them." -- George Lucas, speaking out against the colorization of black and white films

Can you hear the jackwhales singing?

The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou.

Bring on the British Invasion tunes and the dysfunctional families.

Sadly, Kumar Pallana doesn't appear to be in this one. Our loss.

A Man for his time 'n place

With the upcoming Lebowski Fest in New York, everyone's favorite movie is back in the news. The New York Times covers the upcoming gathering (I'd go, but I don't roll on Shabbos), with an article detailing the cult following around the film. Not much here, other than a probably unjustified comparison to Harold and Kumar Go to Whitecastle, and the story of a Wall Street guy who hires based on recognition of dropped Lebowski quotes. I don't know about you, but I take comfort in the fact that there's a guy out there who would hire me based on my Lebowski knowledge.

The real story, however, comes from none other than The Jerusalem Post. Calev Ben-David, in an article published today, focuses on the film's openly Jewish and Shomer Shabbos character, Walter Sobchak. After recounting some of Walter's more memorable lines, Ben-David suggests Walter's Jewishness holds the key to the film's deeper meaning:

Is it just because he doesn't "roll on Shabbes[sic]"? Or maybe because in contrast to the Dude, who takes nothing seriously except bowling, Walter takes everything too seriously – including bowling.

Walter is the ego to the Dude's id, the moral center of The Big Lebowski who insists there are "rules" in life, who declares "This aggression will not stand" and vows "to draw a line in the sand" when confronted with what he sees as injustice, as he rages against Nazis, nihilists, pacifists, Saddam Hussein, "fig eaters with towels on their heads trying to find reverse on a Soviet tank," and a rival bowler tellingly named Jesus "the Jesus Man" Quintana.

The Dude is the heart of The Big Lebowski, but Walter is its (Jewish) soul – and the reason you can count me among its cult of fans.

Ben-David is almost right. But to put Walter's Jewishness at the center of his character is a mistake; his Jewishness is an expression of his rationalism, not the other way around; because he insists on finding meaning in existence, he became a Jew (remeber, he converted). His association with the Jewish people, with the 3000 years of beautiful history from Moses to Sandy Koufax, is an explicit imputation of meaning into history and existence.

As a result of this outlook, Walter takes the world a little too seriously, searching out the meaning and rules in life and enforcing them with an unrivaled passion. After all, he did not watch his buddies die face down in the muck, in the meaningless theatre of war, to return to a world where rules are trampled on willy-nihily. His arch-enemies are nihilists; say what you will about the tenets of National Socialism, at least it's an ethos. When confronted with this nothingness, Walter takes solace in bowling, his Tree of Life, where the rules are clearly defined and meaningful; advancing to the next round is a matter of abiding by the rules, and is just. If you're over the line, that's a foul, mark it zero. It's no surprise that Walter is set to square off against Jesus (whose flamboynat dress and sexual deviance flaunt the austere morals of the traditional bowler) and his Irish partner, Seamus; the adandoning of the Law, within the religious sphere (the bowling alley), is anathema to Walter. On Shabbos, no less.

As for the film itself, that's really just the tip of the Walter iceberg. While we would most closely identifty Walter as a rationalist, the Dude thinks of him in more concrete terms. The bottom line is that Walter is presented, as the film comes to a close, as holding no more answers to life's meaning than the rest of us. He is unable to make sense of Donny's death, other than by associating him with the meaninglessness he experienced in Vietnam* (there's isn't a literal connection). And let's not forget, let's NOT forget, The Dude only got involved in this whole mess because he listened to Walter's advice.

The Dude, on the other hand, who is still the main character of the film, is of a different nature altogether. He is a man trying to decide if the world has any meaning at all. As the film winds to a close, it seems not much has changed for The Dude. The Dude, as they say, abides. I suppose we'll talk more about The Dude later; suffice it to say, although he's still on the bowling team, The Dude remains quite skeptical of Walter's approach to life.

* - The real secret of Donny's death: God smote him for bad bowling performance.

An Open Letter to George Lucas

Dear Mr. Lucas,

We, your once devoted fans, are willing to overlook your recent "creative" indulgences, but please, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD STOP MESSING WITH OUR CHILDHOOD MEMORIES!!!

Thank you, that is all. These aren't the droids you're looking for. Move along.

"That was me and six other guys."

In The Big Lebowski, The Dude tells Maude Lebowski that, among other things, he co-authored the Port Huron Statement (the original, not the compromised, second draft), and:

Dude: You ever hear of the Seattle Seven?
Maude: Mmm.
Dude: That was me, and, um, six other guys.

Maybe I'm alone here, but I figured this was just witty banter. Turns out that Jeff Dowd, the inspiration for the character of The Dude, actually was one of the Seattle Seven!

No word yet on the Port Huron statement, or the Metallica Speed of Sound Tour.

Danny Boy

For some odd reason, I've been having a hankering to hear Frank Patterson's rendition of the classic Irish ballad Danny Boy.

Oh Danny boy, the pipes, the pipes are calling
From glen to glen, and down the mountain side
The summer's gone, and all the flowers are dying
'Tis you, 'tis you must go and I must bide.

For most, I imagine, this song evokes images of the rolling Irish countryside or thoughts of sitting by a warm fire late into the night reading an old book. For me, however, this song brings forth images of Albert Finney, in his pajamas, strolling calmy down a tree-covered street, Tommy Gun in hand, pumping round after round of hot lead into his would-be assasins car, until it crashes into a tree and explodes.

But that's just me.

But come ye back when summer's in the meadow
Or when the valley's hushed and white with snow
'Tis I'll be here in sunshine or in shadow
Oh Danny boy, oh Danny boy, I love you so.

You know, I used to love the blogs. Everything was so fresh and new, there was an unspoken excitement when something new and cool happened. Then, once the allure of fame and fortune set in, folks became all political. Fights started, people joined sides, and all of a sudden you had to worry about offending one of your "allies." People got all uptight about stuff. Things became less fun.

And I shall hear, tho' soft you tread above me
And all my dreams will warm and sweeter be
If you'll not fail to tell me that you love me
I'll simply sleep in peace until you come to me.

Here's to the good old days. "I'll simply sleep in peace until you come to me."

Update: Of course, Frank Patterson's God Bless America tribute was on PBS tonight. The pipes are calling!

All The Dude ever wanted was his rug back...

When attempting to understand a work of art, it is essential to keep in mind the context in which it was created. Just as one's appreciation and understanding of a Picasso is augmented when considered as a response to the surrealist movement, the Coen brother's masterpiece, The Big Lebowski is enhanced when compared with it's cinematic forebear, The Big Sleep.

The Coen Brothers, who are characteristically reticent about discussing the meaning of their films, cite Raymond Chandler's novel, and Howard Hawks' 1945 film adaptation starring Humphrey Bogart as intrepid detective Phillip Marlowe, as the inspiration for The Big Lebowski. The films share many qualities. The Coens pay homage to the original in many ways; the films share characters (for example, a wealthy, wheelchair-bound war veteran), crimes (blackmail) and locales (Los Angeles). On a still deeper level, the films are essentially the same in that they both are about a man trying to make sense of the incomprehensible.

The Big Sleep unfolds from the perspective of Marlowe, the private detective hired by the General to resolve a blackmail case. We never leave Marlowe's perspective, seeing what he sees, experiencing what he experiences. We follow him through the streets of L.A. as he pieces together the clues that lead to murder and betrayal. We are given the distinct sense that Marlowe has no idea what is going on, is making it up as he goes; the plot is convoluted and at times, does not even make sense (the writers, one of whom was William Faulkner, were told to follow the novel's plot as closely as possible, which they did; they were so confused as to who killed the General's chauffeur, they asked Chandler for clarification, and he replied that even he was unsure who did it). By the time the movie comes to a close, we look back and wonder just how we got there.

The Big Lebowski is, in essence, the same. Apart from a few scenes narrated by The Stranger, the plot unfolds exclusively from The Dude's perspective. We follow him around L.A. as he tries to unravel any number of mysteries (who micturated on his rug, the whereabouts of Bunny, who stole his car). Some of these are never resolved (it's still not clear to me who stole the car - was it Larry?), while others are puzzled through by the Dude. While the Coens add a subtle layer of philosophy to the story (there is a lot here, by the way; a lot), the underlying path of the two protaganists is essentially the same. At the end, we know we're done, but damned if we know how we got there. Both films put their heroes in a world that is random, irrational and defies understanding, and leaves it up to them to puzzle their way out. In the case of Marlowe, this begets a great detective story; in the case of The Dude, well, hilarity ensues. Marlowe challenges this uncertainty with all his strength; The Dude, as they say, abides. Both come to the realization that answering the Big Questions will not solve anything. You might as well go bowling.

There's a lot more to be said, particularly about The Big Lebowski, Western religion and nihilism, but that is all for now. I will leave you with a tangential link between the themes presented in The Big Sleep and Lebowski with the recently celebrated holiday of Purim, where the Jewish people, their Temple and connection to God recently destroyed, are cast into a world without God's Presence to provide guidance. They are confronted by an evil that seeks to destroy them, and through a seemingly unrelated string of events come out victorious, a bright new future on the horizon. I think there are a few themes in common here.

A few related links of interest:

• An interview with Joel and Ethan Coen about The Big Lebowskit: The Coens Speak (Reluctanly)


• The Big Lebowski Random Quote Generator


• The International Encyclopedia of Philosophy's page on Nihilism

Prisoner of Azkaban Trailer

[via Maphet via HPANA]

HPANA has a new Prisoner of Azkaban trailer to download.

Looking good! For those interested in the "real" story behind Prisoner of Azkaban, I refer you to this article.

Call me 'Cold Fish'

PaleoJudaica has a nice roundup of commentary about the quality of the Aramaic spoken in The Passion. Sounds a bit shaky.

Nothing beats a good Talmudic Aramaic put-down. My personal favorite: "Al tikrei Hamnuna, ela Kar-nuna." Snap! Oh no you didn't!

On a related note, I also noticed in the preview that Pontius Pilate quotes Nietzsche.

I'm in a bit of a fatuous mood today, in case you can't tell.

I've got a bad feeling about this...

The original Star Wars trilogy is set to be released on DVD in September. Only the Special Editions, the updated and re-released versions Lucas put together starting in 1997, will be on the DVD.

As thrilled as I am to finally be able to own the original trilogy, I'm still ticked off at George Lucas. Why can't we get both the original and Special Editions in one set? Or choose which one we want? This is classic Lucas; mark my words, in a few months or years, he'll release the original trilogy in original form. He did this with Episode I, releasing the VHS copy a few months before the DVD; millions of witless fans purchased both simply to see the "extras." Although, in my opinion, if you felt the need to purchase Episode I at all, you have greater issues you to deal with.

That's what I'm Tolkein about!

I found this list of fun things to do while viewing Return of the King.

• 1. Stand up halfway through the movie and yell loudly, "Wait...where the hell is Harry Potter?"
• 2. Block the entrance to the theater while screaming, "YOU.....SHALL....NOT..... PASS!" - After the movie, say "Lucas could have done it better."
• 3. Play a drinking game where you have to take a sip every time someone says, "the Ring."
• 4. Point and laugh whenever someone dies.
• 5. Ask everyone around you if they think Gandalf went to Hogwarts.
• 6. Finish off every one of Elrond's lines with "Mis..ter Ander-sonnn."
• 7. When Aragorn is crowned king, stand up and at the top of your lungs sing, "And I did it.... MY way...!"
• 8. Talk like Gollum all through the movie. At the end, bite off someone's finger and fall down the stairs.
• 9. Dress up as old ladies and reenact "The Battle of Helms Deep," Monty Python style.
• 10. When Denethor lights the fire, shout "Barbecue!"
• 11. In TTT when the Ents decide to march to war, stand up and shout, "RUN FOREST, RUN!"
• 12. Every time someone kills an Orc, yell: "That's what I'm Tolkien about!" See how long it takes before you get kicked out of the theatre.
• 13. During a wide shot of a battle, inquire, "Where's Waldo?"
• 14. Talk loudly about how you heard that there is a single frame of a nude Elf hidden somewhere in the movie.
• 15. Start an Orc sing-a-long.
• 16. Come to the premiere dressed as Frankenfurter and wander around looking terribly confused.
• 17. When they go in the paths of the dead, wait for a tense moment and shout, "I see dead people!"
• 18. Imitate what you think a conversation between Gollum, Dobby and Yoda would be like.
• 19. Release a jar of daddy-long-legs into the theater during the Shelob scene.
• 20. Wonder out loud if Aragorn is going to run for governor of California.
• 21. When Shelob comes on, exclaim, "Man!Charlotte's really let herself go!"

Funny.

Long Live the King

Ok, saw Return of the King. It. Was. Awesome. I won't bore you with details about each little thing, about the incredible amount of detail put into each and every little scene, or about how the story really brought certain elements to life (Grond!). The bottom line is that you know a good movie when you want to get right back in line and see it again. (check this Blogdigger search to see what others are saying).

A few gripes:

I did not like the way Gollum went over the edge. I had always pictured him falling, almost without realizing, filled with glee at being reunited with the Precious. And I certainly didn't care for the whole, "Oh no, Frodo fell over too!"-Hollywood moment. I'm willing to deal with story modifications to save on time, but throwing in this shtick just ticks me off. Stick to the book, please. A small complaint about the fact that a lot of the characters in the movie come off as monolithic (Denethor is a good example), while in the book they are much more complex. I guess this is in the interest of time...no big deal.

Favorite scences: Eowyn's fight with the Nazgul, the charge of Rohan (gives "Here come the Cavalry new meaning), Legolas and the Oliphant (I'm thinking Jackson had George Lucas in his sights with this scene. I'm not sure I'll be able to get excited watching Empire anymore) and of course, one of the greatest lines in literary history, Sam Gamgee's "‘I can’t carry it for you, but I can carry you, Mr. Frodo!" If they had to give the Oscar to anyone, I say give it to Sam. He's the real hero.

One of the things that makes the story so timeless and intriguing is Tolkein's combination of epic effects from personal causes. The decisions that end up changing history are not military or strategic in nature; rather they are the ordinary decisions of individuals that alter the fate of mankind. Sam's faithfullness to Frodo, Frodo's faith in Gollum, Eowyn's love, Legolas and Gimli's friendship, Denethor's grief, Faramir's insecurities. The motivations and emotions of the characters are projected into the landscape of the epic story, giving them broader and deeper meaning. Sam's faithfullness, while in an ordinary everysay situation may not affect much, brings about Man's salvation.

Lord of the Rings is not, ultimately, about armies and wars; it is about people living, making choices, responding to others in their lives. The good guys are all individuals struggling with their peers. On the other hand, Sauron's Great Eye, ironically, is turned not towards the two solitary individuals sneaking through the back door of Morder, but to the army massing outside his gate. He underestimates the power of the individual, and it his undoing.

Postscript: I found a review from CS Monitor that says basically what I'm trying to say. They also have a picture of some hobbits from Pikesville, MD. I think one of them stole my cloak.

Return of the King

Maphet's going to see Return of the King at White Marsh on Dec. 17 at 7:30 PM. He put out the invite for others, so I'm going too. Anyone else? We can make it into a bloggers meetup.

Best bet is to buy tickets through Fandango.

See you there!

UpdatePreview clips. 'Nuff said.

The High Hat

I recently saw Miller's Crossing, written and directed by the Coen Brothers. This is an incredible film. Practically perfect. It has it all: a plot with twists, great dialogue, stellar acting, a gritty self-awareness and good action. Sprinkle in a bit of philosophy (existentialism, if you please), and you've got a great film. This is probably the Coen's most total film. It just works.

I just realized that I have now seen all the Coen bros. films. Perhaps this calls for a revue? These guys are the best there is out there. Hands down.

Put the Saruman Scene back in!

Seriously, this is about the most important petition you could possibly sign.

I, um, signed it.

In all seriousness, why would you leave out the single most important scene that shows Frodo's transformation, how his experience of ultimate power has not corrupted him, that it is possible, through goodness of spirit, to stand off the tremendous draw of absolute power?!?! This is the whole point of the story!

Yeesh.

Branch out a little

Ok, I'm all into Troy, but seriously, just because your in one movie that involves swords, doesn't mean you have to be in every other movie that has swords in it (Orlando and Sean, I'm talking to you).

Research for this post turned up Pirates of the Carribean 2, with Johnny Depp reprising his role as Captain Jack Sparrow. Savvy? I think so.

Estimating the Airspeed Velocity of an Unladen Swallow

Finally, the question we have all been pondering since our youths has been answered: What is the air speed velocity of an unladen swallow?

Of course, we must first find out if it's an African or European swallow.

I'm not going to even pretend I understand this.

Obsess Much?

For those of you who love to over-analyze movies (as I do), check out the Journal of Religion and Film; all articles are online and freely available.

I've been meaning to submit my paper on the characterization of Western religion in the Coen brother's cinematic masterpiece, The Big Lebowski, for quite some time now.

Do, do, do, lookin' out my back door.

Movies, Movies, Movies

With the help of my trust brother-in-law sidekick, I've been consuming quite a few movies lately. Don't worry; I've completely rationalized this use of my time; the excessive amount of over-analysis I put into each movie far outweighs the concomitant waste of time.

Spurred on by thoughts and comments made by Scott and others, Meyer and I watched Adaptation last week, and this week Confessions of a Dangerous Mind. I thought both were excellent. Adaptation has some of the best writing I've seen in the last few years (not quite Big Lebowski-level, but up there). Confessions has some good writing as well (Barris exclaims, "I'm not killing people... my future's in television.").

I'm deeply sympathetic to the feelings of inadequacey in the quest to produce great art, so the themes of both movies resonated with me. I think Scott and Mesh are correct in their takes on what Kaufman is trying to do with his characters. These are all ordinary people trying to live extraordinary lives. They feel out of place in the world of "regular" people, yet unable to transcend their humble roots. These characters are constantly struggling with their deep awareness of their own inadequecies, causing them to doubt themselves and their abilities. The multiple personalites in these films is meant to convey the characters' ways of dealing with this awareness; Kaufman creates his twin brother Donald, not only in homage to one of the most overused plot devices in history, but in order to project himself into the situations that his self-aware conciousness is unable to deal with. Barris creates the CIA agent-identity to give meaning and purpose to the empty existence that he is all too aware of (I'm convinced that Barris made it up, by the way. His escapades as assasin always come at times of conflict, when his life is on the brink). These are both guys who know they aren't stupid, yet are all to cognizant of the fact that creating the perfect piece of art is well beyond them. Coupled with their inability to settle for producing average or non-original work, it leads them to a state of stasis (you see this more in Adaptation than in Confessions). In Adaptation, the way out of this rut is by embracing your mediocrity, rather than hiding it. Only once Charles gives the reigns to Donald does the story come to a conclusion.

Savvy?

I don't know about sexiest man alive, but Johnny Depp is, without a doubt, one the finest actors of our generation. He deserves a bloody Oscar for his perfomance as Captain Jack Sparrow.

Are we savvy?

For those who can't wait for the DVD...

The Two Towers DVD extras preview from Yahoo Movies.

I'm interested as to how this compares to what is actually on the DVD. How much more is there?

No Matrix Resolutions

Saw Matrix Revolutions this week. I'm going to have to agree with what maphet wrote on the subject. There are no characters here, just caricatures. It seems as if the Wachowski brothers got bullet lists of the major ideas of Western philosophy and religion, and then dolled out lines to various aptly-named persona to recant to the audience. What results is some cool special effects coupled with mind-numbingly boring dialogue.

Using a movie to convey a philosophy is a daunting task. The Matrix devolves into simple assertions, statements of creed, which hardly inspire the viewers towards contemplation. What movies are good at showing is how characters experience events. Take Lord of the Rings, for example. Peter Jackson employs no sophistry in articulating the deep themes of the novel; the characters simply play out their parts, without preaching to the audience on the ideals or values they represent. Still, the audience comes away with a deeper recognition of the truths expressed by the author. Understanding The Matrix Revolutions is simply a matter of deciphering he analogy, wading through the intentionally-obtuse gobbledy-gook spewed forth from the actors.

That being said, I'm looking forward to Return of the King.

Matrix Revolutions - Fir